Replies

>>I’m not confused about US VISIT. It’s just not an issue in Congress or for the dems in the negotiations on immigration reform.<<

Not an issue? Have you suppressed the Vitter amendment 1339 from your memory, which failed 48-49 with Dorgan voting FOR, and some of your favorite RINOs voting against it:

Collins (R-ME)
Domenici (R-NM)
Graham (R-SC)
Gregg (R-NH)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Lugar (R-IN)
Martinez (R-FL)
McCain (R-AZ)
Specter (R-PA)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Warner (R-VA)

I am not claiming that the only immigration dynamic is Republican vs. Republican. I am not claiming that unions do not, on certain issues, demand outrageous and unfair laws. Making wage scales for guest workers that give them an advantage over US citizens is despicable.

You are usually thoughtful in commenting on complex political issues, but you are oversimplifying with statements like “...will never understand what is happening in the real world of GOP versus Dems.” You may have misunderstood our reaction to what we view as betrayal by Republicans who call themselves “conservatives.” I despise Dems who sell us out in a different way from hypocritical Republicans who sell us out.

>>Allow me to speculate: If Bill Gates wants his 200,000 H1B Visas, he will have to sit down at the table with the Communication Workers of America and the AFL-CIO to work out a compromise that allows the unions access to the H1B workers.<<

Are you suggesting Gates, who wants unlimited visas for himself, is the good guy?

If you push US workers too far (including engineers), you may see the seething anger of the peasants strengthen unions, and if conservatives form an alliance with them, the WSJ/Chamber of Commerce wing may realize it has killed its golden goose. Temp workers are necessary, but there must be limits, and on immigration the WSJ types do not necessarily hold the good of their nation nor its citizens as the highest priority.

Vitter is irrelevant. The south's position on Mexicans is no different than their position on blacks.

Now as for you hardliners not comprehending the real dynamic of immigration reform, that is easily proven.

In 2004, the GOP could have unified behind the Bush Plan, but the hardliners refused. For them, the Bush Plan, which was the traditional GOP position on immigration, was not good enough.

In 2006, the Senate passed Hagel-Martinez. This legislation was far worse than the Bush Plan.

In 2007, the legislation was worse than the 2006 legislation, and far worse than the Bush Plan.

In 2009 there will be more legislation and it will be worse than the legislation of 2007, 2006, and the Bush Plan.

The hardliners have been able to block each of these, but each time the legislation gets handled, it shifts to the left/gets worse.

Immigration reform was/is inevitable. Eventually it will pass. And, as Tancredo said in 2004, the legislation that Congress produces will be far worse than the Bush Plan.

Even tho the dems are soundly beating the GOP on immigration, you hardliners insist on blaming the GOP.